This Tucker Trial Transcript Was Sealed Because It Wasn't Damning Enough

While researching my book on Preston Tucker, I came across a curious notation in an index to the Tucker files at the National Archives in Chicago. There was a "sealed deposition," with no other description. I spoke with an archivist who told me he would pull it and tell me more about it. All he could tell me was that it was a deposition of Joseph Turnbull and that it had been sealed by a Federal Court order. It would take another Federal Court order to open.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

I knew who Turnbull was, of course. He was the "accountant investigator" who had been the final prosecution witness in Preston Tucker's famous trial. While the prosecution had promised he would be the final nail in Tucker's coffin, his testimony had not been as devastating as the prosecution had hoped. In fact, it was after Turnbull's testimony that the defendants all agreed to waive calling any defense witnesses and simply proceed directly to closing arguments.

Most Popular

The testimony in the sealed transcript had been taken in one of Preston Tucker's lawsuits which he had filed after the acquittal in Chicago. Tucker sued the Detroit News and other media outlets for defamation – he thought they had gone a bit too far in describing him as a fraud. But what had Turnbull testified to and why was the transcript sealed? To find out, I engaged an attorney in Detroit to file an action and get the transcript unsealed. In Re: PRESTON TUCKER was filed in 2013 and the court heard arguments made by attorney Ian Lyngklip about my project and how the transcript might help us understand what happened in the litigation more than 60 years ago. On June 27, 2014, the court ordered the transcript unsealed and shortly after, a copy of Joseph Turnbull's deposition sat on my desk.

What it contained was fascinating. Turnbull's testimony had gotten worse over time – as viewed from the perspective of those who thought Tucker was a crook. As Tucker's attorneys questioned Turnbull, Turnbull's attorneys tried to muddy the waters and simply began objecting whenever they thought Turnbull's answers might help Tucker. Even after Tucker's attorneys had agreed to give the defense attorneys a "continuing objection," they kept objecting. They objected 34 times, many times to questions which were not objectionable in the least.

Turnbull admitted he had not looked at any of the Tucker documents in six years, and even back then, he had not bothered to check the items he had listed as questionable in the corporation's books. He had seen two cars Tucker had sold to the company but did not bother to find out that Tucker had sold them for exactly what he paid for them. Other money which Tucker had been reimbursed had likewise not been checked. Turnbull had no idea whether the expenses were legitimate or not. Tucker's attorney asked Turnbull point blank if he had any knowledge that the expenditures claimed by Tucker and his associates were "not bona fide and proper?"

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

The defense attorney objected vigorously, of course, after which Turnbull said, "Well, I have no knowledge of those claims at all." By this time, Turnbull had no strong opinion about the financial dealings of Preston Tucker or his corporation. All he had done was look at the books, write some summaries, and reach no conclusions about whether any of it was legitimate. As far as he was concerned on the day of his deposition, Turnbull was not prepared to say that Tucker and his associates had actually done anything wrong.

Which is why, I believe, Turnbull's attorneys ran to court and asked to have the transcript of the deposition sealed. The transcript was sealed in April 1956. Preston Tucker died in December 1956 and the litigation he was pursuing ground to a halt. When the cases were dismissed, everyone seemed to move and the sealed transcript sat in the file – first in Detroit at the Federal Court and then later at the National Archives.

Luckily for us, the law now frowns on sealing transcripts and will often unseal ones which were sealed back in the old days. It just takes a little bit of digging and some litigation. And this transcript has shed a little more light on Preston Tucker and how little evidence the prosecution actually had against him and his business associates.

Steve Lehto is a writer and attorney from Michigan. He specializes in Lemon Law and frequently writes about cars and the law. His most recent books include Preston Tucker and His Battle to Build the Car of Tomorrow, and Dodge Daytona and Plymouth Superbird: Design, Development, Production and Competition. He also has a podcast where he talks about these things.

Sign up for the Road & Track Newsletter

Please enter a valid email address.

Thank You!

You have chosen to receive our newsletter at . You will receive an email shortly confirming your subscription.